|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.129.54.230
In Reply to: RE: MM vs MC is MC THAT much better? posted by MannyE on December 29, 2016 at 05:54:12
The high inductance/impedance MM/MI cartridge forms a low pass filter when interfaced with a phono preamp. On most MM/MI cartridges the low pass filter has an effective frequency of approximately 20kHz.The problem is that a low pass filter doesn't just operate on the frequencies above its effective frequency. At frequencies as low as 1/10 the effective frequency (2kHz for this example), the low pass filter introduces phase shift. This can impart the same sort of issues that tone controls do to the music.
Tone controls have been removed from most audiophile products due to the phase shift introduced to frequencies across the audio band. In other products tone controls are included but they also include a bypass switch to remove the tone controls from the signal path.
All of this works around the problems that a low pass filter can introduce. The same problem exists in the low pass filter that the MM/MI cartridge plus phono preamp interface creates. It cannot be eliminated unless you reduce the impedance and inductance of the MM/MI cartridge.
There are several manufacturers that have offered low output versions of their non-MC cartridges. SoundSmith, Grado, Stanton and Pickering come to mind as manufacturers of cartridges that worked around this issue with low output, low impedance, low inductance models.
The transparent open sound that a LOMC cartridge possesses is likely due to the lack of low pass filter issues in its interface with the phono preamp. Its not a free ride and the low output MC requires a stepup transformer or pre-preamp stage to boost the signal level.
This extra stage of amplification introduces another place for something to go wrong. That plus the fixed stylus assembly makes LOMC cartridges unacceptable to some people.
In practice a high quality, high output MM/MI cartridge can get very close to a LOMC cartridge. In the end, a high output cartridge drags around the low pass filter issue with it and that cannot be removed from the reproduction. Many people find a high output cartridge perfectly acceptable.
I did until I heard a LOMC through a top quality front end. That ended the argument for me. For others its not an issue. Maybe you need to try a LOMC so you can make up your own mind.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Edits: 12/29/16Follow Ups:
And yet there have been exceptions to this phenomena. The old Technics EPC 100 MK4 has a 1mv output, high enough for not needing a step up device and yet low enough inductance to resonate at 100kHz and to be flat to 80 kHz.
There's already been a push to make MCs reach MM levels. But, If lower-output (and inductance) MM's were to become popular we could eliminate a lot of the problems they've had historically; especially now that quiet, high-gain amps are relatively common.
Big J
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
SoundSmith and Grado make low output MM/MI cartridges with very low moving mass and very good stylus choices. These cartridges make the choice between LOMC, LOMM and LOMI difficult.
All of these require the extra amplification stage that all types of low output cartridges require, and I believe all of them have fixed stylus assemblies. That makes choosing between them difficult.
In the end you have to listen to each cartridge, paired with the same tonearm and phono preamp you will be using, if possible. The issue of whether they are moving coil, moving magnet or moving iron (induced) cartridges is not an issue. How they sound is.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: